Smitty

lol! I admire your ability to make lemonade and find the silver lining! Anyways, a centuries old debate; as long as people have rights to own property, there's gonna be crappy landlords and crappy tenants... Smitty

Isn't part of this question about balance? Tradition? The public interacting with nature? Yes, skiing, camping, golfing, hiking, biking, canoeing, rock-climbing doesn't "harass" fish or consume wildlife directly, like fishing activity. But each of those activities and consumptive on some level, and involve people. And seeming "contradiction" is ok; the national parks were intended as places where conservation and preservation occur, with human activity. For the reasons stated by the other replies, fishing is an activity that I think is a net gain for the park, because it fosters an appreciation (even 'love') for what the park stands for. Its been that way in Jasper and Banff since they were founded, and they're already regulated, in terms of development. But more to the crux of my argument; this province already tries to (varying degrees of success, depending on where you stand) at protecting areas that address different users and scenarios. Don't want ski hills, golf courses, no fishing, no hunting? Guess what! Been there, done that! They're collectively called, White Goat wilderness, Siffleur wilderness, Ghost wilderness. Basically all you can do is hike and shoot photos. I'm ok with some part of the province like that. What about an area with little human development (golfing, skiing) but consumptive hunting and fishing allowed? We've got that too; Willmore. And then, our national parks, a tradition stretching back more than a century. I say leave it alone. So you see, the province has provided the public with wilderness areas that would satisfy a variety of users with varying philosophies. Using biological and genetic integrity is just a cloak in my opinion, that covers an agenda; designed for less and less people to use the parks as they were intended. Its a gross violation, in my opinion. You're really interested in ecological and genetic integrity? Then C&R on the natives, and allow harvest license for non-native species. Heck, you could even employ anglers ala Quirk Creek type projects to help you out. Try not to single out fishing as a contradiction when many contradictions abound already in Park policy. Smitty P.S. A little disturbed/perturbed by your wording/warning "be careful with your reply". Why? Are park staff monitoring this thread? Is Sheila Copps (early proponent of eliminating fishing...). What exactly do I have to be careful about? Were you actually intending it as some sort of cautionary warning, like there is a wrong answer I should be afraid of? Honestly, it makes your post look a little silly, in my opinion. P.P.S. Be careful how you reply, I may pay Taco to be sicc'd on you...

Well, as I said in my pm, total jackass move by the angler. Really burns me when people climb high horses to judge other people's legal method of fishing. Not to mention the outright, sheer, breathtaking stupidity of trying to criticize someone or their child in public like that. Even if - IF! - someone has some sort of valid point, did the idiot think for a second his "educated viewpoint" would sway or convince you in any way??? How you say stuff is far more important than what you say, some people don't get that. When it comes right down to it, some people are just born to act idiotic. Anyways, my sympathy for you and your son; hopefully, your boy will get over it by next season and get excited to go again. Smitty

That scene from Family Guy was both gutsy and hilarious. As for the other video, the guy has a nice, typical country voice, but the lyrics are enough to pine for the days when our classrooms had blackboards (instead of whiteboards) so I could run my fingernails down them. Yeesh. Smitty

Keep it coming SL, your posts speak volumes on your thinking. And if retire early, and decide to give back, volunteer, promote and give to charities, where does that fall on your moral spectrum? Yeah, you see what happens when you make assumptions? Remember, the most successful capitalist pig you and I know SL is a fellow by the name of Bill Gates. Besides making truly crappy operating systems (I'm reserving judgment on Windows 7), being prosecuted by the DOJ for monopolies, he has,...wait for it...inoculated literally hundreds of thousands of poor people, and has given millions of $ away. Buffett has also given billions to this organization, with the caveat that Gates spend x % per year. Its called the Bill Gates foundation; and it is the largest charitable organization in the world. I know its beyond your understanding to accept that people who work hard may actually give back, but next time you are in a museum, arts center, or music hall, take a look at those plaques at the front acknowledging the patrons/supporters. Man, was that Husky Oil I just saw that helped build my world class theatre!!! Once more, oh the humanity! ----------- But keeping judging SL, keep judging. You're doing a bang up job. I'm sure God and Jesus are monitoring this thread with interest, looking forward to the day they can retire, and have you take over. ------------ In regards to the last couple of posts, bang on. That's why I don't use the word 'deposits'. There is only one deposit, a security deposit. Everything associated with a pet is a non-refundable fee. Oh, and I explain this to my tenants; they're often not aware of this or some of their other rights. Smitty P.S. I've gone from yesterday's frustration to today's amusement. Keeping pitching SL, I like the right field fence. Edit P.P.S. If charging rent = what the market will bear, and is usually within 5% of all the other similar properties nearby, then yes, I "gouge" constantly.

Yes, I must admit my participation in the mother of all thread hijacks. Sorry! Sometimes I act like the damn, freshly stocked, 6" fingerling who can't resist biting at the first trolled leech, no matter how poorly tied it is... Smitty

Thanks for serving! Besides owing you my thanks and gratitude, I'll say I don't begrudge anyone who gets a hard earned pension, least of all a soldier. Frankly, as someone who has a conservative bent, I think we could do better in taking care of our armed forces, currently serving, or retired. As for what have I done, I'm afraid my contributions might pale to yours if we're making comparisons. Just a fairly typical university graduate with a teaching degree and some business's on the side. Seriously, no idea what I said to make this so personal, did I offend you in some way that you would characterize my opinion as 'stinky'? Or is everyone's, including yours, painted by the same broad brush? Where did I read that your sons were forced to rent those units? No one is forced to rent 'crappy' apartments! As for rent increases, they can be negotiated, just like virtually every aspect of the lease. But this is the problem with yours and SL's stance; that if someone were to purchase a 2nd home to rent out to help pay (1) bills, (2) pay down a mortgage, (3) buy an extra flyrod , (4) Go to Vegas every 3 months, who are you to judge? You want to talk greed, then stick to Michael Moore movies and the Wall Street fat cats and leave middle class people, whose great sin is to create an extra income stream, alone. This cannot be understated; for someone to be bitter and full of hatred or to think that someone who operates a real estate business is somehow a societal evil just clearly isn't thinking straight. You fought so that I could live in a free country; that would include, my right to buy a zillion properties if I want to? You think that's bad or something? Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? As you said, aren't I the same as every other one of the 33 million joes in this country who have the right to pursue profit through a legal business ventures? Where do you think employees get jobs from? Wait for it...the business owner! The owner who...wait for it risks capital to start and run the business. Where do people who don't have a downpayment live? They rent! And I get tarred and feathered for having the unmitigated gall to..hush...gasp...own a rental property. Oh the humanity!!!! As you said, everyone is entitled to an opinion, question is, is yours informed? Does it have credibility? It's not so much I have a problem with the tiresome anti-capitalist rants, its groundless assumptions, cheap shots, and stereotyping that takes place. I have no problem admitting that there are greedy dickhead landlords out there, is it ok to ask that some of you acknowledge that there are irresponsible, idiotic tenants that break laws, damage units, and thus, inevitably, cost everyone money? Thought not... Smitty

SL: Wow. Typical jackass comment by you. Honestly, how do you stand living in this province and in this country? Seriously, you don't like regulated, free-market mixed capitalist/socialist economy, then I suggest Cuba or China. I take pride in the fact that I treat tenants with respect (to the point of giving them gift baskets) and I advise them of their rights as a tenants. Myself, and my property manger, have excellent reputations. Trust me when I say, I have been "screwed" (insert joke by Taco here ) by tenants far more often than I have "screwed" them. I once tipped my hat to you for taking steps to live "green", but frankly, for someone who accuses others of being myopic, there has been no better example of myopia than your anti-business attitude that permeates your whole life. To the point of abject hypocrisy. You live, essentially, in the business capital of western Canada, you live in the province that has the oil-sands, by doing so and paying taxes, you implicitly support these "regimes". How do you stand yourself? I mean, do you take the blue pill or the red pill in the morning? You lack nuance, and substance with your one-sided rhetoric, its both amusing and frustrating. Your rants would be more illuminating if they actually had any measure of practical application in reality. But instead, you participate and benefit from the province that embraces hard working business's, and have no appreciation for them, and then have the gall to say "we'd all be better off if we just did away with this freedom to choose to own a business thing". Anyways, go ahead SL, reply, I am sure you've got the varnish all ready to shine up the soapbox. Smitty P.S. Midegwater, no doubt we could come to an agreement. As I said, its all about what's reasonable.

As a landlord, I'll offer this perspective: There is absolutely no way that all things else equal, the wear and tear is the same with a non-pet tenant versus one that does have a cat or dog. There are responsible and irresponsible tenants and landlords that do a very good job at making the rest of us decent landlords and tenants look bad. I for one will never be taken in again be the song and dance of "my animal is perfect routine". It has never happened that a cat or dog didn't create an issue of some sort. But, nevertheless, I still rent some of my places to pet owners. Fido/Garfield needs a place too. I ask for an upfront pet fee usually $75 to $250 bucks, plus an additional $10 to $25 additional rent each month. $100 seems excessive; its as if the landlord wants to take out her bad experience on you, which is totally unfair. And, to make matters worse, the landlord clearly hasn't taken care of the problem from the previous owner. I'd run as far away as possible from renting from someone like that. Just saying that per owners do add wear and tear, and landlords are perfectly justified in re-couping additional costs. But, as you said, they demands for additional monies have to be fair and reasonable. Sounds like you were dealing with someone not so reasonable. Smitty

Don: I just want to know, when you're out trolling at Beaver lake, do you use a bamboo rod? Or is all of your trolling done with a keyboard? Smitty P.S. Either way, looks like you got a bite. P.P.S. Egocop, don't mind Don; its just that he remembers the days when quadding meant using a saddle and pack boxes, and carrying a spare was a necessity for travelling the treacherous Edmonton-Calgary corridor.

Hey Sun: If you're not exhausted by this topic yet in explaining relatively straightforward concepts to people who like comparing apples to cauliflower, why don't you post on the other forum with the perch meat offer, so you can get blasted for that too? Smitty

At the utmost, severest risk of revealing the utter geek kingdom in which I inhabit, what would you be referring to?: 1) Dementors? 2) Nazgul? 3) Vampires? 1 td from a kick return, another a complete gift of 30+ yards in penalties. Yes, I do believe I saved myself from humble pie and eating crow. CROW!!!! That's what it is! Just thought of that as I typed the last sentence. Too funny... Smitty P.S. In my defence, you said creatures, not birds, so naturally...oh never mind

I'm gritting my teeth with the present pain of calling your chickens prematurely before they hatch! I'm a big Eskimo fan, but I haven't seen much this season that will convince me that the Esks will beat the Stamps. Lets say I'm reluctant to put money on it... Smitty

Well, I may be in the small minority, but I don't mind the inconvenience of them filming a movie here. Brings business and $ to our economy, and have films like Unforgiven, Brokeback Mountain (insert homophobic joke here) Jesse James, is good for putting Alberta on the map. Glad to see some $ towards a permanent film studio in Calgary. Makes sense. Remember, the nice thing about the filming locations being tied up is that it's temporary. Smitty

Ah yes, a time honored, noble cause; poaching the king's deer to feed the downtrodden serfs. However, I submit to you Uber's point about even affording to live in that community; indeed it may be a terrible assumption on my part, but it does strike me as an absolute absurdity that he (or anyone here) would justify it as a "I'm too poor and I need food" defence. Seriously!?????? Smitty

Fair enough Taco, I learned something new today. (checked it on wikipedia, which is never wrong But in the end, when you get past the semantics, and substitute the proper word in Sun's first sentence, i.e. thief, instead of poacher, it doesn't detract from the strength of his position, or leads me to support Neil's somewhat naive opinion. There are plenty of organizations that have rules and regulations to follow, that have nothing to do with the GOVERNMENT (emphasis Neil's). And there are consequences, as there should be. An example is an abusive hockey coach that got a 2 yr ban from coaching, because of his breach of conduct rules. That's got nothing to do with the 'government' either. Bottom line is that I think the residents acted appropriately and gave him a fair punishment. He should be grateful it wasn't longer and he should avail himself to get some education and understanding of how much work goes into these kinds of community resources. Smitty

same difference eh...

Uber: Yes, I believe with the proper permits, they can implement any security measures they want. When Pitt was filming Jesse James in Fort Edmonton, the security was unreal. Smitty

I thought I heard something about a Leonardo di Caprio film being made in Kananaskis. No idea whether that has anything to do with what you faced, but I did also hear security is quite tight. Smitty

Yes, I will echo the same comments. Thank-you. Mike

One thing that I "re-learned" from the guide license meeting is that people (including me) in general like things simple. And I agree with the principle that the resource is too valuable to use for free. So as stated above, make everyone get a license, therefore everyone gets the limits that go with it. Make it $10 bucks for kids under 16 and seniors, plus a WIN card. Now everyone gets tracked, everyone has a license. (Clive, $5 is simply too cheap to help cover admin costs, IMHO, might as well go with $10 or free. Given what the costs are for my nephews to ski, play hockey, and buy video games, $10 is still tantamount to stealing). Smitty

Yes, please do. I'd hate to have to explain it to you, I can't find the diagrams. Smitty

Well I think Avalanche is essentially correct, the forum does belong to the operators. I am not a fan of censorship myself, really, who is? But you agree to play by the rules when you sign up. As for the other issue that Pythagoras highlighted, yes, no doubt there is inconsistency. My only 2 cents is to say that hey (1) the mods are human, (2) and, once more, its tough volunteer work. It really is. Couple of times I've raised my eyebrows, but I thent ry to remember the countless hours that goes into making this board work. Lots of strong minded, well intentioned, intelligent people here. (not sarcasm... ) Smitty

I hope flame fans were watching the Oiler's game last night; now that's how you blow a lead and squeak out 2 points! Smitty

Din, the other "precautions" are the common sense we've been inundated for years, do they don 't lend weight to your opinion. Both "sides" of the argument advocate a common sense approach to avoiding infection. Secondly, I stand by what I said. If that's what it took to get you to explain yourself, it served a good purpose. Thanks for your explanation and clarifications. Its not about your obsession with media hype and our "closed" minds, its about weighing what intelligent, informed people are saying. That's the basis for the original question. Something as serious as a pandemic, and infectious disease is too important to discuss on the level of "let me pit my uniformed opinion versus your uniformed opinion". It was perfectly justifiable to put your opinions to the test. Anyways, you provided the basis of why you are not getting the vaccine, and that is appreciated. You haven't convinced me, but at least I can move forward in investigating whether your claims are true or not. As far as I've gotten along in this issue, it appears there is more consensus amongst knowledgeable people that would support getting the vaccine. Smitty